62 Assembly Proceedings, March 17-April 21, 1762.

U. H. J.
Liber No. 36
April 24

to Cover which (viz.^t) Objections in 1758. to taxing those two
Objects you say most of the others were only thrown in as a Barrier;

Whereas, We now repeat, that no objection has been made to taxing
either of those perticulars neither his Lordship, nor those Great
Officers you refer to, having any objection that we know of against,
a proporsional tax either upon his Estate or their Officers; for the
Objections you would have thus understood are only to the manner
and the quantum then proposed Considerably above the proportion
at which other people were to have been taxed; and to prevent as
far as possible every future Oppertunity of poisoning the minds of
the people by their Imposing upon their understandings, permit Us to
Inform you that the true general question in debate is whether the
Lord Proprietary, the upper House and People shall be subjected
to a new and Unconstitutional power of Oppression without any
remedy or not, the parties are the two Houses, the Lower House has
been Contending for the Affirmative and this House for the negative
in nine successive Struggles upon this Important Question a Concern
upon a disappointment in any of your Sanguine per suits being natural,
we can easily Credit your Expression of sorrow that what you call

p. 95

an Occasional Waiver of your rights in respect to the mode of pro-
ceeding on Money Bills, has not had the Effect you desired from
our Unhappily (instead of proposing Objections, or amendments to
your Money Bill pursuant to the leave you had given us) Disputing
the Rights you assume in respect to such a Bill and thereby Obstruct-
ing the Establishment of such a Claim Had you indeed Waved
your Obstinate Adherence to your unwarrantable Assessment Bill
and paid a due regard to our former Objections so far as they were
Applicable, your Waiver had been of real Importance to his
Majesty's Service and your own Credit, and might have afforded us
some Encouragement, to add our assistance in promoting so laudable
a design but we must take the Liberty to tell you that you waived
nothing upon this Occasion because you had nothing to waive; for
your Claim of the same rights with the British House of Commons
tho you seem inclined for the present to allow as those of the British
House of Lords, will avail nothing, because having different founda-
tions no Inference can be fairly drawn from the Right of One to
Establish the Claims of the others; the House of Commons have a
law peculiar to themselves called Lex parliamenti, which is we pre-
sume founded on the Antient Usages of that perticular Body; If you
should be pleased to be called the House of Commons, We think
you would gain nothing by such a measure because as the House of
Commons of Maryland, would still be a distinct Body from the
House of Commons of Great Britain, we do not perceive how
assuming the Appellation of the British House of Commons, will
trasfer to you that Lex parliamenti of the House of Commons in
Britain, their Antient Usages not being your Usages; and perhaps